Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 364 P2D 693 - Barnes v. Clark

Barnes v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

1961

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
2
states following
March 1992
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently March 1992

7 state decisions

401961197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Siegenthaler v. Newton · Apex Siding & Roofing Co. v. First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n of Shawnee · Maxfield v. Maxfield · Rader v. Star Mill & Elevator Co. · Lindauer v. Hill

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““ ‘Documentary evidence of previous inconsistent claims made by the plaintiff concerning the claim sued upon is properly admissible in evidence, but such evidence is not conclusive and may be rebutted and explained; and where it is of strong probative value, it nevertheless is not sufficient in law unless it is further established: (1) Such claim was successfully maintained in the former action; (2) such claims are clearly inconsistent; (3) a final judgment must have been rendered; (4) the parties and questions are the same; (5) the party pleading es-toppel must have been misled and have changed his position; and (6) it must be unjust to permit the party to change positions.’ “See also Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Ouart, 200 Okl. 258 , 192 P.2d 698 , and Maxfield v. Maxfield, Old., 258 P.2d 915 .””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.